Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 23:17:25 GMT
Server: NCSA/1.4.1
Content-type: text/html
Last-modified: Fri, 08 Mar 1996 19:46:31 GMT
Content-length: 12707

<HEAD>
<TITLE>CS 484/584 </TITLE>
<HEAD>

<BODY background="/~billjunk/images/back2.gif">

<!WA0><IMG ALIGN=MIDDLE SRC="http://www.cs.uidaho.edu/~billjunk/images/rainbow.gif">

<H1>CS 484/584 Software Quality Assurance</H1>
<H2>Spring 95-96</H2>
<H2>3 semester credits</H2>
<H3> http://www.cs.uidaho.edu/~billjunk/courses/cs484/exer3.html<BR>
 Last updated: 8 March 1996 </H3>

<!WA1><IMG ALIGN=MIDDLE SRC="http://www.cs.uidaho.edu/~billjunk/images/rainbow.gif"><P>

<!WA2><A HREF="http://www.cs.uidaho.edu/index.html"><!WA3><IMG width=28 height=22
ALIGN=middle SRC="http://www.cs.uidaho.edu/~billjunk/images/csclogo.gif"></A> Computer Science 
Home Page

<!WA4><A HREF="http://www.uidaho.edu/"><!WA5><IMG width=22 height=22
ALIGN=middle SRC="http://www.cs.uidaho.edu/~billjunk/images/uilogo3.gif"></A> Univ. of Idaho Home
Page<P>

<!WA6><IMG ALIGN=MIDDLE SRC="http://www.cs.uidaho.edu/~billjunk/images/rainbow.gif">   


<center><B><H1>Exercise 3 -- Quality Assurance</H1></B></center>

There are two options to select from for this assignment.  Option 1 is a case study in
which you prepare a Software Quality Assurance Plan for an organization.  Option 2
has you preparing review guidelines for some common software review activities.<P>

<HR>


<center><B><H2>Option 1<BR>
Software Quality Assurance Plan</H2></B></center>

If you elect this option for Exercise 3, you must prepare a Software Quality Assurance Plan 
(SQAP) for the project described in the accompanying case study, SureSafe Security 
Systems Company.  You should prepare your SQAP following the outline provided in IEEE 
Std 730.1-1989.  The IEEE outline provides that the following sections should be include in 
your plan:<P>
<PRE>
        1.  Purpose
        2.  Reference documents
        3.  Management
        4.  Documentation
        5.  Standards, practices, conventions, and metrics
        6.  Reviews and audits
        7.  Test
        8.  Problem reporting and corrective action
        9.  Tools, techniques, and methodologies
       10.  Code control
       11.  Media control
       12.  Supplier control
       13.  Records collection, maintenance, and retention
       14.  Training
       15.  Risk management
</PRE>
Additional information is available in IEEE Std 983, Guide for Software Quality Assurance 
Planning.  (In December 1995 IEEE announced the approval of a revised standard IEEE 
Std 730.2 Guide for Software Quality Assurance Planning which supersedes IEEE Std 
983, but it will probably not be in general circulation for a few months.)  Although the IEEE 
format is being used, you do not need to have the IEEE standard available in order to 
select this option for Exercise 3.  In most cases the contents of a document section can be 
prepared following a common sense approach to software development based on good 
software engineering and sound management practices.  If you need some assistance or 
want to see the IEEE standard, please contact me individually.<P>

This SQAP must be written as though it will be applied to a real project by a real 
company.  Therefore, you may have to make assumptions and decisions about what the 
company is going to do to define and implement software quality assurance. I'm guessing
that a well done SQAP for this assignment should require from 10 to 15 pages.<P>

<B>Due dates:
<UL>
<LI>On-campus students:  April 16, 1996<BR>
<LI>Off-campus video outreach and NTU Students:  April 30, 1996<P>
</UL></B>

<center><H2><B>Case Study<BR>
SureSafe Safety Systems Company</B></H2></center>

<B>The company, individuals, and situations describe in this case 
study are entirely fictional.  Any similarity to an existing company or 
organization is purely coincidental.</B><P>


<H3><B>Company Description:</B></H3>
SureSafe Safety Systems is a relatively small company with a 
total employment of about 250 people.  The company is located in Seattle, WA where all 
development and manufacturing activities are performed.  Several wholesale offices are 
located in other major US cities.  The company markets its products to independent retail 
home security product vendors and installers.<P>

SureSafe was founded in 1972 by Mr. Robert Atwood who is still participating in daily 
company operations as its president.  Mr. Atwood has BS and MS degrees in electrical 
engineering.  Prior to founding SureSafe he designed intrusion monitoring equipment for 
major industrial supplier.  Shortly after Mr. Atwood left his former employer he hired John 
Smithson to collaborate on electrical designs and Gary McMillian to provide product 
design and mechanical engineering support.  During their first year of operation additional 
personnel were gradually hired in supporting roles, including office personnel, laboratory 
technician, and manufacturing personnel.  Although capital funding for the start up of 
SureSafe was scarce, the company has had ten consecutive years of profitable 
operations.  The company still maintains a "no frills" attitude with respect to facilities and 
equipment.<P>

As a response to a continual growth in sales and employees, a major company 
reorganization occurred in 1980.  Gary McMillian was promoted to Manufacturing 
Manager.  Mr. McMillian is beginning to think about the possibility of retiring.  During the 
reorganization, John Smithson was promoted to Engineering Manager.  He subsequently 
left the company in 1991.  His replacement was Charles Taylor who joined SureSafe with 
no previous experience in the security systems field although he had 10 years of system 
design experience and 15 years of management experience in the electronics industry.
In 1992 Mr. Taylor consolidated all of the staff responsible for software development 
activities into a single organization reporting directly to himself.  A search was initiated for 
a person to manage this newly formed group.  The successful candidate was Julie 
Johnson.  Julie was selected over a number of internal and external candidates.  She 
initially began her employment with SureSafe in 1986 as a direct college hire after 
completing her BSCS degree.  At the time of her hiring there were only seven employees 
doing software development.  Today there are 20.<P>

Since SureSafe produces equipment destined for consumer use, it is not directly regulated 
by federal or state government entities (as is the case for example of medical device 
manufacturers).  However, their equipment does need to be safe for use by consumers and 
must comply with general product safety requirements and national electrical codes.
In 1990 SureSafe became interested in the possibility of being certified as an ISO 9000 
compliant manufacturer.  They hired a consultant to review their development and quality 
assurances practices.  After a one week on-site evaluation the consultant reported that he 
did not believe that SureSafe had adequately defined development and manufacturing 
processes to ensure a successful ISO compliance review.  He indicated that SureSafe 
personnel appeared to be generally unaware of the requirements for certification and the 
impact that these requirements might have on development practices.  In particular, the 
results of the audit indicated that SureSafe had no clear, well-documented product 
development process and that supporting software development documentation was 
inconsistent or non existent.  Further findings cast serious doubt on the thoroughness with 
which software was being tested.  As a result, SureSafe hired another independent 
consultant to draft a Software Development Standard for use in all software development 
projects.  Several current software developers were asked to contribute to and review the 
Software Development Standard as it was developed.  In July 1991 the current version of 
the Software Development Standard was approved by Mr. Taylor.<P>

<H3><B>Starting a New Project:</B></H3>
While their 20+ year history has been successful, SureSafe 
now wishes to expand its operations by developing an easily expandable and 
customizable unit to allow them to be more cost competitive in existing markets and to 
enter additional markets  The Marketing group believes that technology has advanced to 
the point that this new product can be built and successfully sold to improve SureSafe's 
profitability.  The Marketing group has produced a preliminary requirements document 
which identifies the key product features and market needs.  The Engineering group has 
begun the detailed engineering (functional) specification.  The rights to use software 
developed by another company, SoftCraft, have been purchased.  This software provides 
voice recognition features that are planned for the new products.  SureSafe will port the 
SoftCraft code to run on the processor used in the security system.  The ported code will 
be integrated with some new software being developed by SureSafe.  Extensive reuse of 
code from existing SureSafe products is anticipated.  SureSafe's New Products 
Development group, headed by Jerry Gibons, is performing all the electrical and 
mechanical design for the product.  New Products Development considers itself to have 
leadership responsibilities for the new generation of SureSafe products.<P>

Three months ago when the project was started, management felt that a time frame of 5 
months was realistic because of their previous track record in computer controlled security 
systems, extensive leveraging from existing systems, and also because the voice 
recognition software (purchased from SoftCraft) had already been developed, thus 
eliminating a major portion of the design work.<P>

However, due to several significant specification changes and the resulting rework, the 
project is now projected to be two months behind schedule.   Software and hardware 
design are underway and a prototype (hardware) unit is due to be completed by the 
engineers within the next two weeks.  Some of the software should be ready to try on the 
prototype in about three weeks.  In an attempt to keep the project moving as fast as 
possible, management has instituted a bonus plan whereby the project team will be 
monetarily rewarded for meeting future project deadlines.<P>

At this time the following documentation is available: Marketing Analysis (Preliminary), 
Functional Specification (Preliminary), electronics schematics, mechanical assembly 
drawings, software architecture diagram (module hierarchy and major data structures), 
source code listings for the SoftCraft programs.<P>

Marketing now believes that the market window is very narrow and is pushing for the most 
expedient development path possible.  An important trade show is only 4 weeks away and 
it is important that Specialty Medical have a working system to show potential new clients.<P>

<H3><B>The Assessment:</B></H3>
The QA Manager, Martin Adams, has openly expressed his concerns 
that the organization is not adequately prepared for meeting all of the demands of this 
development project.  He believes that the company may be pushing too hard to meet the 
upcoming trade show deadline by cutting corners on some of the design work.  He is 
particularly concerned that a faulty system would do serious harm to the company's 
reputation.  He has heard about your extensive experience in the software field and has 
retained you as a consultant.  He wants you to study the situation and prepare a Software 
Quality Assurance Plan that will be effective in helping to ensure that only high quality 
products are delivered.<P>

<HR>

<center><H2><B>Option 2 -- Review Guidelines</H2></B></center>

If you elect this option, you must prepare comprehensive Review Guidelines for three of the 
following types of reviews:  

<UL>
<LI>Software Requirements Reviews
<LI>Preliminary Design Review (architectural design)
<LI>Usability Review
<LI>Detailed Design Review (logic design)
<LI>Code Review
<LI>Test Design Review
<LI>Test Case Review 
<LI>User's Manual Review
</UL>

A review guideline must be a comprehensive list of items to check during the review.  A 
stating point can be the information presented in class during Sessions 19 and 20.  Your 
guidelines must substantially extend the information presented in class.  Be sure to 
address the follow:<P>

<UL>
<LI>  Entrance criteria
<LI>  Required items
<LI>  Review issues and points (checklist of things to look for)
<LI>  Measurements
<LI>  Exit criteria
</UL>

You can use your own experience to help with the expansion, but you may also find it 
advantageous to consult other sources.<P>

If you want to develop guidelines that are tailored to your own organization, you are 
welcome to do so provided your results aren't considered proprietary.<P>

<B>Due dates: 	
<UL>
<LI>On-campus students:  April 16, 1996
<LI>Off-campus video outreach and NTU Students:  April 30, 1996
</UL>
</B>


